|
jschell wrote: How are you going to introduce a complete refactor gradually?
There is just 2 class that need be scrapped.
One is valuable for it static event. The other is valuable for its method that I reproduce it all.
It will be a minor change.
My code is (allegedly) big, the insertion is small.
|
|
|
|
|
...I do not want to become friends with my children.
It's been over six years since I have logged in full stop, I don't know and refuse to reset my password and my kids are so glad I told them all those years ago not to try and friend me.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Wait a minute...your kids are adding their parent to friend list? You must be the coolest father ever.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
No they are not. Told them no 8 or so years ago.
Facebook is sending emails recommending them as friends.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Ah that. Yeah, they think we like everyone.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: when they're going to come back at home
Your parents ran away?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Martin wrote: It's been over six years since I have logged in full stop
Not full stop for me... But I usually only go once a year or every 18 months to delete crap and check the settings and make them the most restrictive I can find.
But being honest... it was actually helpful a couple of years ago to reestablish contact with old buddies that had changed their email addresses / phone numbers.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I deleted my account. About 8 years ago, I had created an account and after 1 month I had 2 friends, both ex-girlfriends. The ironic thing was my long-term girlfriend at the time would not friend me!
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I just wrote this in a piece of code I'm overhauling:
protected abstract override void ......();
An abstract class (inheriting from another abstract class) which is going to be implemented by a bunch of concrete classes which will all also be implementing two other interfaces at the same time.
What unholy mess are you getting yourself into Dave?
|
|
|
|
|
There are stranger things under the coding heavens, Dave! 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but it feels ... wrong. A class structure that can't make up its mind how it's going to do the job.
I really can't complain. I'm the one designing the solution. Sometimes I know not why my brain comes up with this stuff. 
|
|
|
|
|
know not the unknowns, that's a legal option ...
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: Yeah, but it feels ... wrong
I somehow was expecting that ending in other way  
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: System.ItDidntWorkException: Something didn't work as expected.
Should that be "Something didn't work, as expected"?
|
|
|
|
|
Its actually a jab at all the questions where the entire problem description is "it didn't work".
|
|
|
|
|
May I suggest you...
The Weird and The Wonderful[^]
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a protected, abstract function which overrides an inherited abstract function that returns void. If anything is strange it's that you have a need for it to begin with. Why override an inherited abstract function with another abstract function? In the inheritance hierarchy in C# ancestral abstract functions still need to be defined by concrete classes.
|
|
|
|
|
Now that's a good question - my thought as well. Why is this needed at all?
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Are you sure it's not a protected abstract function that overrides an inherited virtual function?
abstract class A
{
protected virtual void Foo() => Console.WriteLine("A.Foo");
}
abstract class B : A
{
protected abstract override void Foo();
}
class C : B
{
protected override void Foo()
{
Console.WriteLine("C.Foo");
}
}
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
 I had not considered that possibility.
|
|
|
|
|
The base abstract has a base implementation that sets up a default environment for processing a data "packet". The higher level abstract is actually three abstract classes, each covering a certain "class" of data, that each implement their own version of this method to further setup the environment that the concrete classes are going to use to process their "class" of "packets".
By the time you get to the concrete classes, they should already have everything they need to start processing its little version of a "packet" and finishing off the implementations of the two abstract classes. Each of the ~60 packet types fit into 3 different "classes".
Basically:
Overall Abstract Class Framework for processing a "packet"
/ | \
/ | \
Type 1 Abstract Type 2 Abstract Type 3 Abstract Additional framework for each packet "Class"
\ | /
\ | /
~60 Concrete Classes Supplies processing implementation for each packet
It feels wrong but it's working out perfectly so far.
I wish I could post some code samples and details but security prevents it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
.
